I see her skating her LP with less and less speed (relatively) which could be part of the problem. That system of more speed and flow is ALWAYS a good system.

You know that is one big issue i have with this sport, how come speed, and distance coverage are not compiled or marked? How skating does include traveled distance and highest speed in 3.5 minutes surely should count for something even as a performance reference but not necessarily exact scoring. Is this still a sport or not?

Otherwise one can skate to something slow and comfortable, classical and predictable with regular beat that everyone knows (oh wait.. that seems what everyone is doing) since they don't have to work as hard.

You know that is one big issue i have with this sport, how come speed, and distance coverage are not compiled or marked? How skating does include traveled distance and highest speed in 3.5 minutes surely should count for something even as a performance reference but not necessarily exact scoring. Is this still a sport or not?

Otherwise one can skate to something slow and comfortable, classical and predictable with regular beat that everyone knows (oh wait.. that seems what everyone is doing) since they don't have to work as hard.

I think that the judges do reward fast skating in their scores across the board. But just going by the published rules, what the CoP seems seems to want is variation in speed and effortless acceleration. This language appears in the GOEs for step sequences and choreographic sequences, as well as in Skating Skills. I think it also plays a tacit role in P&E, CH, and INT.

You know that is one big issue i have with this sport, how come speed, and distance coverage are not compiled or marked? How skating does include traveled distance and highest speed in 3.5 minutes surely should count for something even as a performance reference but not necessarily exact scoring. Is this still a sport or not?

Pure speed is not what the goal is. It's effortless skating (with speed and power thrown in). I can get across the ice in whatever manner possible to generate speed or I can stroke and use my edgework effectively to get across the ice. What would you rather watch?

Pure speed is not what the goal is. It's effortless skating (with speed and power thrown in). I can get across the ice in whatever manner possible to generate speed or I can stroke and use my edgework effectively to get across the ice. What would you rather watch?

No that is not what i meant by speed. It would be nice to know what are the average speed for a particular Hanyu FS program through out the season for example. Compare to Hanyu's other FS last year or its debut this year. You can compare speed, and distance between different performances to see he skated faster a the GPF final version compares with WC version for example, so no wonder his GOE and PCS is higher there. His Romeo and Juliet program require him to skate faster in the first half of the program than his NotreDame this year and so forth. It could be displayed in a form of line graphs, or pie charts that shows speed trend through out the program and so forth. They are just performance indicators to create and satisfy skating geeks, it can make useful references for referees and fans who likes to compere performance say whether Patrick skated faster than Hanyu and during which part, and how Hanyu's Quad different from Patricks, be it height, speed, power etc. and so forth. I think that would make the sport more fun and credible with those information at hand.

Similarly, with such a system in place, we'd able to say Mao's 2nd 3A is the best in the Olympic seasons and so forth etc..

Originally Posted by Mathman

I think that the judges do reward fast skating in their scores across the board. But just going by the published rules, what the CoP seems seems to want is variation in speed and effortless acceleration. This language appears in the GOEs for step sequences and choreographic sequences, as well as in Skating Skills. I think it also plays a tacit role in P&E, CH, and INT.

It may sound fine in theory, but in practice PCS doesn't seem to have been adapted correctly according to its stated purpose. The empirical evidence through out various GP event for their own favoured skaters seems to suggest they were used as placement holders within a narrow corridor as supported by the +- 0.5 system according to the recent ex judge interview. It is only through unpredictable results such as someone under performed, then this sort of PCS marking are exposed. Disproportionate PCS reward regardless of the TES score (as Mishin so honestly put it), what went on ice on the day. That is why i have previously been advocate a separate panel of judges that devote to PCS marking only, who are not anonymous and each are accountable for their area of expertise with more than just an absolute numerical value when it is only an estimate. I'd even be fine with the placement = x score rather than as it is.

Consider all the technology we have today, where sport performance can be measured with greater accountability with records and stats history in support to portray a skater's career, highs and lows in the season (numeric value for total score at different competitions are rather limited information), it is really strange it is not being adapted at all, even by the television broadcasting companies independent of ISU. Major sports like baseball, basket ball, tennis, American football, Soccer would certainly be a less sexy sports without the stats to back it up. Stats can be incredibly sexy, credible and exciting way to profile a skater. Figure skating could be the equivalent of F14 fighter jets of sports; complex, interesting, sophisticated, artistic, endurance and exciting. It deserve more than a faulty system using elementary values attempt to quantify abstract estimates with absolute values, when it is very likely these values get distorted annually when The Power That be just decide to change them, and that every judges likely to measure with different yardstick with tolerable threshold of indifference that can easily manipulate the outcome.

For example, from what exactly and how did they decide 8.5 for a 3A is the correct/fairer value relative to a 6.0 for 3Lutz? Is it by rarity, success rate, amount of energy it takes to execute it? Because it does not taking account of any of the above, the number then seems non sense. And people were wondering why there are no more 3Lutz in ladies, the reason is simple maths. They changed the GOE relative scoring to encourage the quads, but failed to factor the relative value for the ladies. It should be necessary when you think Men and Women skate differently and have include different components in their programs. While they increased the value for the quads and 3a, Lutz remains unchanged. So why should ladies go for 3Lutz anymore when its reward just depreciated, but its value remained unchanged. It is not like they can go for 3A either, unlike Guys can go for the quad, who's point system makes the reward worth while.

I see her skating her LP with less and less speed (relatively) which could be part of the problem. That system of more speed and flow is ALWAYS a good system.

Its only working to get Mao doubles. But she is winning her events so maybe that's what the goal is. When Mao gets some more triples and doesnt single or double most of them then its value on getting triples can be discussed with relation to Mao. She may need a better coach to teach her doubles. Because right now she is the worst jumper in FS- but she is winning so she is using the system very effectively.